Emergent Stupidity
The phenomenon was first recorded by Francis Galton in 1906, and has subsequently been endlessly verified, often with much enthusiastic bloviating about the notion of the “wisdom of crowds”: take an unknown quantity (in Galton’s case it was the weight of an ox at a county fair), and ask people to estimate the correct answer. If you take an average of those estimates, you are far more likely to arrive at the correct answer than if you choose to stand by any individual guess. The average of a large number of estimates is likely to arrive at, or close to, the correct quantity. Estimates cluster around the true value in either direction, with highs and lows canceling one another out, leading to an average often remarkably close, or exactly at, the true quantity.
But it is important to realize the specific conditions under which collective intelligence proves accurate. The independence of those providing their judgements, or estimates, is essential. Estimates must be free from influence and coercion, and derived from a diversity of opinions. If you put people into a group where they discuss their estimates, some eloquent and/or aggressive ignoramus may well rationalize or harass their team into a radically off-quantity far removed from the average they would have arrived at if acting individually, and far removed from the actual quantity. This experiment in the wisdom of crowds also offers insight into collective stupidity.
In order to realize the power of collective wisdom, we need to support and maintain individual independence and viewpoint diversity. The wider the range of information and perspectives, the better. Groups are often hostile to this principle. While the path to collective wisdom is narrow, collective stupidity seems to be more common and natural. Sadly, collective stupidity also seems to be an emergent characteristic. That is to say that collective stupidity (irrational and counterproductive ideas and behaviors) seem capable of exceeding the individual stupidity of any single member of the group. Stupidity, as a group dynamic, can exceed the stupidity of the lowest common denominator.
